Recently, I have been talking to animal abolition and animal welfare people. In case you may not know the difference I'll describe the two in their basic belief system.
Animal abolitionists (the many I have spoken to) are anti-animal law. They do not believe in the legal system at all for animals. For example, they would not rejoice if hunting was abolished on this planet. They believe save all animals now or allow them to all suffer. They DO have an all or nothing mentality, regardless of what they may say, when it comes to saving animals in the legal way. They believe the ONLY solution to saving animals is by education and education alone. Nothing else matters whatsoever.
Animal welfarists definitely believes in animal law. But so much to the point of being just as irrational as not believing in animal law at all. For instance, they rejoice in hearing it become law when over-crowded chicks are allowed an inch more space in factory farming. They believe in working moreso on causing less animal suffering than totally ending animal suffering.
Both views are ignorant, misinformed and just plain assinine.
I talked with one animal abolitionist and asked if there was a petition to sign into law where ALL animals in the world would be legally protected from any kind of suffering, using, etc. and could have their freedom except flies and you signing it would make that law, would you sign it. The person said no. (In fairness, I answered my own question by saying I definitely would sign and then work my hardest to prevent suffering to flies. I believe all animals should be free unless basically their sole purpose in life is to cause misery, pain, desease, and maybe even death to another being, like for instance fleas. Flies have been known to be quite postive-productive in the world!)
There are other ways to help animals. Education is just one way. Animal laws are just as important in the animal rights movment to save all animals as education. But by spending so much time making law, for example, one inch more space for chicks is ridiculous. The way to effectively work in animal law is to totally end something--like hunting (which Costa Rica did recently--Bravo!), or even shutting down cruel places of businesses. That's ending cruelty.
Animal Abolitionists care nothing about the individual animal. Actually, I'm not sure if they really even care about animals at all, going by their mentality. They seem to be on this hellbent "all or nothing" way that they loose sight on saving any and all animal suffering. I don't know who started this animal abolitionist crap but those that bought into it--if the animal abolitionists I've talked to are correct in their definition as stated above--are deluded.
At least animal welfarists believe in animal activism multi-tasking. They believe we should educate, petition and vote. This is excellent. We need to do all we can for animals, and not just educate.
I don't believe in animal abolition or animal welfare. But I do believe in animal rights. And the way that animals get rights is by doing sensible, intelligent actions.
Animal abolitionists (the many I have spoken to) are anti-animal law. They do not believe in the legal system at all for animals. For example, they would not rejoice if hunting was abolished on this planet. They believe save all animals now or allow them to all suffer. They DO have an all or nothing mentality, regardless of what they may say, when it comes to saving animals in the legal way. They believe the ONLY solution to saving animals is by education and education alone. Nothing else matters whatsoever.
Animal welfarists definitely believes in animal law. But so much to the point of being just as irrational as not believing in animal law at all. For instance, they rejoice in hearing it become law when over-crowded chicks are allowed an inch more space in factory farming. They believe in working moreso on causing less animal suffering than totally ending animal suffering.
Both views are ignorant, misinformed and just plain assinine.
I talked with one animal abolitionist and asked if there was a petition to sign into law where ALL animals in the world would be legally protected from any kind of suffering, using, etc. and could have their freedom except flies and you signing it would make that law, would you sign it. The person said no. (In fairness, I answered my own question by saying I definitely would sign and then work my hardest to prevent suffering to flies. I believe all animals should be free unless basically their sole purpose in life is to cause misery, pain, desease, and maybe even death to another being, like for instance fleas. Flies have been known to be quite postive-productive in the world!)
There are other ways to help animals. Education is just one way. Animal laws are just as important in the animal rights movment to save all animals as education. But by spending so much time making law, for example, one inch more space for chicks is ridiculous. The way to effectively work in animal law is to totally end something--like hunting (which Costa Rica did recently--Bravo!), or even shutting down cruel places of businesses. That's ending cruelty.
Animal Abolitionists care nothing about the individual animal. Actually, I'm not sure if they really even care about animals at all, going by their mentality. They seem to be on this hellbent "all or nothing" way that they loose sight on saving any and all animal suffering. I don't know who started this animal abolitionist crap but those that bought into it--if the animal abolitionists I've talked to are correct in their definition as stated above--are deluded.
At least animal welfarists believe in animal activism multi-tasking. They believe we should educate, petition and vote. This is excellent. We need to do all we can for animals, and not just educate.
I don't believe in animal abolition or animal welfare. But I do believe in animal rights. And the way that animals get rights is by doing sensible, intelligent actions.
